Personality Cafe banner

Why blaming the past society for today's problems is a bad idea....

7K views 178 replies 29 participants last post by  recycled_lube_oil 
#1 ·
For this example, I'm focusing on racism.

So while listening to music from my past, I came across this old gem.



Lol, now I loved this song back in the day. But I realized there was a line in there, that would be totally considered unacceptable by today's standards.

"Be color blind, don't be so shallow!"

Now, when it comes to race things back in the day, I was an "ally". Fuck yeah! I'll see you as an individual! Rock on!

Now though, this is wrong. "We" decided, if we fail to see color, you're just a privileged A-hole.

Look, I'm not going to argue this. BUT, don't fucking call me racist. I don't care how many times society changes its mind about representation.

People go through trials and experiences, they change history for a reason. That doesn't mean someone who participated in an antebellum party, or said the "n" word with a soft a, is a racist. Time builds off the experiences of others.

Would people be such advocates of color recognition, if we hadn't been willing to be color blind in the first place?
 
See less See more
#2 ·
For this example, I'm focusing on racism.

So while listening to music from my past, I came across this old gem.



Lol, now I loved this song back in the day. But I realized there was a line in there, that would be totally considered unacceptable by today's standards.

"Be color blind, don't be so shallow!"

Now, when it comes to race things back in the day, I was an "ally". Fuck yeah! I'll see you as an individual! Rock on!

Now though, this is wrong. "We" decided, if we fail to see color, you're just a privileged A-hole.

Look, I'm not going to argue this. BUT, don't fucking call me racist. I don't care how many times society changes its mind about representation.

People go through trials and experiences, they change history for a reason. That doesn't mean someone who participated in an antebellum party, or said the "n" word with a soft a, is a racist. Time builds off the experiences of others.

Would people be such advocates of color recognition, if we hadn't been willing to be color blind in the first place?
I think preference is a thing even in today's society, i.e IF a certain race was overall on average less attractive to another race, one cannot simply say you're racist for not finding my race attractive.
 
#17 ·
It kinda is racist though. Who decides which race is most attractive? The one in power, white people. White people tan themselves whilst Asian and black people bleach their skin. Which is more damaging? I see Asian women with unattractive white men simply on the basis they've been taught white is attractive. White people benefit in the attraction game simply by the colour of their skin, not because theyre actually attractive. I never thought I would have been attracted to a brown person - I thought it was a "preference" - until I did. And now I see people of colour attractive that I probably would have been blind to before. All because I actually met them and got to know them, not because I was listening to what media told me about them.
 
#3 ·
Now, when it comes to race things back in the day, I was an "ally". Fuck yeah! I'll see you as an individual! Rock on!


Look, I'm not going to argue this. BUT, don't fucking call me racist.
Another narcissistic take on a societal issue?

What's the clear, non-rambling version of "Why blaming the past society for today's problems is a bad idea"?
 
#4 ·
Another narcissistic take on a societal issue?

What's the clear, non-rambling version of "Why blaming the past society for today's problems is a bad idea"?
I'm sorry, was that too complicated?

Society grows, just as people go through levels of learning. You can't look back and blame people for the intelligence you have now. Someone, somehow, set that shit up for you.

Like you can't look back and blame the Curries for having cancer, when they openly participated in making the world a better place. Blame them for radiation now.
 
#6 · (Edited)
#ShitWhitePeopleSay You may as well have prefaced the post with "I'm Not Racist But..."

Seems like rationalization to dig your head in the sand some more while lamenting you don't have "colour blindness" as a buzz word to hide behind. It's ironically a way to deflect responsibility and remain ignorant because you were "set up" by someone in the past. Noblesse is good but the Oblige part is kind of a bummer eh?

No one expects whites to give a shit, so why bother with the token excuses not to do so?
 
#7 ·
"We" decided, if we fail to see color, you're just a privileged A-hole.
I think this is retarded. I don't know who those "we" are, but "they" require urgent psychological (or psychiatric, even) help.
Discrimination cannot be solved by another discrimination, "positive" or not, which is what dividing people by colors is doing, instead of seeing everyone as individuals not defined by them.

If we want a fair society where everyone is treated fairly and equally, recognized by who they are rather than by their birth details, then we should do exactly that. See everyone as individuals and focus on the reduction of factual injustice and prejudices. Half-assed measures won't change anything. Blaming white people who did zero harm to people of other colors simply because, historically, their (or not their) white ancestors did something is useless and won't achieve anything. People who did nothing wrong owe zero apologies for anything. They cannot be responsible for choices that they haven't made.

Those who actually practice racism and factor it into their decision-making processes, indeed, must be punished. Regardless of which color their racism is targeted, white, black, or any other.
 
#8 ·
I think whats happening SOMETIMES is, certain groups were mistreated in the past so they use that as ammo to scream #Injustice and rightfully so but after awhile when there is justice, SOME people of the group keep holding on to that card and playing that narrative until they gain an advantage which in turn just oppresses the other group who wronged them in the past and this power game just swings like a pendulum and it's no surprise, alot of people are selfish and a lot of people will say w/e to get what they want.
 
#25 ·
I feel your pain. Call me an old fashioned racist, I'm still at individuals.
Why is this racist? Racism is unfair discrimination based on skin color. Individualism is about personality characteristics, not skin.
 
#15 ·
It only took the ramifications of class actions of widespread govt policies to finally understand that attempts to assimilate those little biracial kids into white culture (here in Australia) and the cybermen to try and assimilate for the idea of colour blindness for us to step back and go, waitaminit - I wonder if it was Doctor Who that finally got the concept through though.
 
#28 · (Edited)
OP: You had a pretty straighforward idea, it's interesting and telling how people chose to respond to with their wildly off topic takes, given their own personal agendas.

But, yeah. I mean, I grew up in the 90's and remember the 80's, colorblindness was commendable, the only notable ethnicities in the US were: Black and White. And publicly, gay people didn't exist, lets not talk about that and other queers, forget about it. People who were trying to do their best didn't have the full picture and by today's understanding at best their efforts were often cringe, and people who weren't trying at all and just dealing with the status quo would probably publicly dragged nowadays.

The ideas we have now of social justice are about people today in the context of today, which has needs and problems that didn't exist in the before-times. Luckily there's no record of a lot of our actions to re-interpret for a lot of us back then, and much of get to grow and learn without having being anchored to the the past. I give that grace to the peeps in the 1880s as well at the 1990's.

I forgive you Jenna Marbles, I know you wouldn't have done that shit now, you shouldn't have ever stopped putting up vids.
 
#30 ·
It wasn't commendable. Not really.

Indigenous studies and philosophical discussion was pretty mainstream in opinion that everyone deserves to retain their own identity and laws were already reflecting that you don't get to take biracial kids away from their parents to assimilate them into the dominant white culture without some sort of fuss - because that is forcing a cultural genocide. It's just taken this long for mainstream thinking to catch up to the teeniest bit hip to this idea.

We've had LGBT Mardi Gras since 1978. WTF America?

It's reaaaalllly taken a long time for anyone to notice that people can retain their own culture and not be a massive threat to the white population. Or not, in the case of Florida.
 
#41 ·
It's actually pretty sad that such a statement even has to be made. But going through life I've found that far too many people take the concept of 'guilt by association' to extremes far beyond anything remotely reasonable.

For example. I'm with a group of friends and I watch them intimidate someone and take their jewelry from them. It's my responsibility to stop my friends from doing that. And if I'm too weak to do it physically, then it's my responsibility to talk them out of it, or at the very least end my association with that group of friends. Failing that, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say I'm guilty by association. Even if I don't participate in the robbery and just stand off to the side. I chose to hang out with those friends, so it's reasonable to hold me accountable for that association.

But when it comes to the association between someone and their ancestors. It is not always within the realm of reason to hold them accountable for the relation. I'll give three examples.

Example #1: My ancestor stole an artifact from your ancestor and I've now inherited it and it's in my possession. There is clear evidence for this. While I cannot be held responsible for the theft of the artifact, it is my responsibility to return this artifact to you, the rightful heir.

Example #2: My ancestor stole an artifact from your ancestor but I have not inherited it and it is not in my possession. I cannot be held responsible for the theft nor is it my responsibility to return what was stolen.

Example #3: My ancestor stole an artifact from your ancestor. I have not inherited it nor is it in my possession. But I celebrate that ancestor who stole from yours and built a statue for them and honour them with a national holiday. This is reasonably guilty by association. I chose to associate myself by honouring them(assuming I'm aware of what they've done).

The problem is that it's difficult to tell which example of the three someone falls into. Especially with the notion that we live in a democracy where if the majority want something to happen, then it's supposed to happen. So then how does one reconcile that with the fact that Thanksgiving is a holiday celebrated by the majority of the American population? Or how does one reconcile the idea that the "people" are in power with the fact that America is the biggest supporter of Israel? A state that is basically reenacting what the European settlers did to the natives when they arrived in America. Or what about the fact that African artifacts are kept in European Museums? It makes one wonder if the apple really has fallen as far from the tree as some like to claim.

When you take into the consideration how freely available information is in this day and age, it's difficult to assume anyone is completely ignorant to what's happening around them. It's much more reasonable to assume that more often than not, the person before you is the guy who stands off to the side while his friends intimidate and rob innocent people. Then when they're friends are done, they go and have a drink with them.

Now I know that things are not as they seem. And that the media controls the narrative. For one, the people are not in power. I walked the streets of London with millions of fellow Brits in protest against the war in Iraq. I was 15 at the time. I was naive and couldn't wait to be old enough to vote so I could make a difference. But it dawned on me when a mere month after the "people" made it clear we wanted no part in that fraudulent war, British soldiers were in Iraq, against the wishes of the majority of the population. We, the public, have no say in anything important. We are merely difficult but useful tools that can generate wealth for those in power. All this entertainment and bullshit ideals about equality and democracy etc is just a distraction so we can drop our guard and become easier to control.

In the end, when shit hits the fan, it's the "people" that pay the price, and those in power will continue to reap the rewards. Whether it's war, or an economic recession, the elites will be bailed out by the commoners. And the commoners will be too busy trying to turn their pawn into queen to realise that the game is rigged.

But all in all. None of that truly matters. You can only deal with what's in front of you. Don't let some hormonal dickhead try to make problems you can't do anything your responsibility just because they are pressed. Live your life as honestly as you can and fuck the rest. You're going six feet deep soon enough anyway.
 
#43 ·
For this example, I'm focusing on racism.

So while listening to music from my past, I came across this old gem.



Lol, now I loved this song back in the day. But I realized there was a line in there, that would be totally considered unacceptable by today's standards.

"Be color blind, don't be so shallow!"

Now, when it comes to race things back in the day, I was an "ally". Fuck yeah! I'll see you as an individual! Rock on!

Now though, this is wrong. "We" decided, if we fail to see color, you're just a privileged A-hole.

Look, I'm not going to argue this. BUT, don't fucking call me racist. I don't care how many times society changes its mind about representation.

People go through trials and experiences, they change history for a reason. That doesn't mean someone who participated in an antebellum party, or said the "n" word with a soft a, is a racist. Time builds off the experiences of others.

Would people be such advocates of color recognition, if we hadn't been willing to be color blind in the first place?
The technicalities of language has always been a losing proposition of control and missed the plot to me. I could not be fussed to police my language. I'll express the content itself as best as I can and whoever is listening can choose to perceive it for what it is or whatever worldview they're choosing to project on those words. It's their problem, not mine.

If they have something to say of value then I'll learn.

We grow, we understand. That's the world. Things change for better and worse. Words themselves meanings change over time, it's a fluid landscape. Ever negotiated, and what's good and well today in the future may not be. In fact it's very likely. ---

Now back to the base thread title as a general idea, blaming the past for today is definitely not worth while as an endeavor. While it's understandable the past lead to the present, I think anyone functional knows that the energy spent blaming the past whether it's your own life, or some broader concept, is such a waste of energy, in trying to accomplish anything in the future, like a worthwhile vision. Past can inform, and it's sort of free experience to study but living there has never been the healthiest choice. No matter the abuse.

Saying so does not invalidate the experience or meaning or the pain of the past.

Nice thread.
 
#47 ·
I literally just saw a thread within the last couple days with people claiming its wrong, racist, or something to note the race of or point out favorite "Black" musicians..........Aaaaaaand now its wrong, racist, or something to be colorblind. Which is it goddamnit!? Everything is "racist" nowadays! I don't feel like I can even eat my morning cereal nowadays without that being called "racist" somehow too!
 
  • Like
Reactions: recycled_lube_oil
#56 ·
Lets just call all white people racist and call it a day, shall we?🙃
 
#59 ·
Clearly I just like to see people squirm when I expose faulty logic. I will give you a straight answer:

I think multiracial couples are clearly not racist. They go against the grain, often against the wishes of their families, and often to the derision of others, & accept their lover regardless of skin colour. They act out of love. Would it matter if this couple identified as colourblind or not? The result is the same. That to me is proof that not everything has to be racist, internalised or not. I would extend the same to people not in multiracial relationships too.

See it’s easy when you don’t have to defend backwards logic. You can call it as it is.
 
#62 ·
Imagine a person who believed that everything on the earth is one big ocean. They can’t see the land for the hills. So you take them to the beach and show them: here’s where the land meets water. The golden stuff is land and the blue stuff is water. Those crashing waves are the transition between the two. And yet somehow, because of their belief system that everything is water, they deny what’s before their eyes.
 
#63 ·
You can’t win with people who move the goalposts.

I’m going to buy a new dog. With this particular breed I can choose black or white. If I choose the white dog I’m a white supremacist, because I believe white dogs are superior. Clearly I prefer a dog of my colour. If I choose the black dog it’s because I enjoy having power and control over blacks. Clearly I’m going to keep it on a leash and perpetually caged because I’m a massive racist, and oppressor over dark coloured things.

Any choice you make is twisted to fit a narrative. Once you point out the faulty logic, the rules change. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. You cannot win because the game is designed to create perceived egregiousness, whether it exists or not.
 
#69 ·
I mainly have a problem with the idea of everything being racist, no matter what, defined on a scale. I don't necessary disagree with categorising things on a scale. I would put it like this: things can be racist, not racist, & if they are racist, then defined on a scale of how racist they are.

Denying the ability for something not to be racist/sexist/whatever, sounds like a religious viewpoint i.e. we're all sinners, regardless. Except at least in that worldview, one can repent and be absolved of one's sin. :LOL:

Brushing against someone in the supermarket is not sexual assault, even if the person has previously been a victim of such. Crimes have intent and motive. You can't accidentally sexually assault or rape someone (maybe there's an extreme exception, but generally). The maliciousness of the intent will define the severity of the punishment.
 
#70 ·
That individual attitude scale and where you fit is changeable and just because it says racist scale doesn't automatically put you into the same category as VikingCoprolite2000@whitepower.com and it certainly doesn't put the multiracial couple there either. I didn't put it there to call anyone out and name people individually. I put it there so we can understand that instead of being het up about it. It's about as offensive as posting a gay scale. Nobody says that because you score a 0 on the gay scale you are instantly put into the same group of gay to the power infinity.



Most of the time people of a different race might not even be in their purview. I know most people probably have a friend of a different race and you might have things in common and sometimes you might bag out each other's race in a fun way I live in a city that has 251 languages spoken and our biggest problem. Get this.... our biggest problem right now is Terfs and Nazis vs specifically Trans but LGBTQI- on our Parliament steps literally goosestepping while police stood as a barrier and sig heiling and fuck me if I ever thought that my day could get weirder than that the police then beat up the people who called them (the people goosestepping and seigheiling) Nazis. Same as it ever was. You don't have to worry about the order of things changing drastically and the world becoming too wokey for anyone to be able to function without offending someone and them calling you out for being egregiously egregious. Shit just doesn't happen that fast.

Since only 5 of 1000 (that is 995 getting off) rape charges even go to court according to RAAIN does it even matter what anyone thinks brushing up against someone might mean? To frot or not. That is the question.
 
#72 ·
This reminds me of an episode of the Good Doctor where this one sjw doctor kept trying to push this black girl to stand up for herself, fight social injustice, etc. And, it kept pissing her off because she didn't want to. At the end of it, she makes this speech about how she's not complacent, she's tired. It was really moving.

The difference in the past vs. now is that we got to pick our battles. Like everyone said, these battles aren't new (and it's not just race). These wins don't happen overnight. Generation after generation have taken their place to make small steps towards a better future. People weave in and out of causes as they have the energy and passion for them. That just goes with the territory of moving large groups.

What's different now is that if you're not constantly fighting, you're the problem. I get it, I get the why and the message, but sometimes, people are just tired. And you can play the, must be nice to have the luxury of being tired, card, but that's not how life works. Everyone has a journey and that's where individuality comes in. Like ENFP said, there are different types of complacency.

But there is a reason the saying, "Hindsight is 20/20," exists. Because it's true. You can't judge the past based on today's knowledge because it didn't exist back then. In one generation, if you weren't color blind, then you're racist. In the next it's completely different, that doesn't make you racist in the past, or today.

It's like in taking this position, we're challenging people not to grow. Either be right in the first place, or you're wrong. It's like saying a physicist isn't really a physicist because they weren't doing equations when they were 10. No, they weren't always doing equations, but as of right now, they're still a physicist.

Society, along with media and more connectedness, has taken so many positions of injustice right now, that it feels like you have to be on your guard, and hyper aware 24/7 to avoid stepping on landmines. Again, this isn't just about race that was just the example used.

It's exhausting and people need to be able to tap out when necessary without the wrath of the universe coming down on them.

I will admit cancel culture seems to have slowed down a bit, but the threat is still there. Agree with the majority of people on the issues that matter most in the moment, or be destroyed.

For someone who never really liked or felt like a part of society in the first place.....it's like being held hostage by it now. You can't just turn it off.
 
#108 ·
This reminds me of an episode of the Good Doctor where this one sjw doctor kept trying to push this black girl to stand up for herself, fight social injustice, etc. And, it kept pissing her off because she didn't want to. At the end of it, she makes this speech about how she's not complacent, she's tired. It was really moving.

The difference in the past vs. now is that we got to pick our battles. Like everyone said, these battles aren't new (and it's not just race). These wins don't happen overnight. Generation after generation have taken their place to make small steps towards a better future. People weave in and out of causes as they have the energy and passion for them. That just goes with the territory of moving large groups.

What's different now is that if you're not constantly fighting, you're the problem. I get it, I get the why and the message, but sometimes, people are just tired. And you can play the, must be nice to have the luxury of being tired, card, but that's not how life works. Everyone has a journey and that's where individuality comes in. Like ENFP said, there are different types of complacency.

But there is a reason the saying, "Hindsight is 20/20," exists. Because it's true. You can't judge the past based on today's knowledge because it didn't exist back then. In one generation, if you weren't color blind, then you're racist. In the next it's completely different, that doesn't make you racist in the past, or today.

It's like in taking this position, we're challenging people not to grow. Either be right in the first place, or you're wrong. It's like saying a physicist isn't really a physicist because they weren't doing equations when they were 10. No, they weren't always doing equations, but as of right now, they're still a physicist.

Society, along with media and more connectedness, has taken so many positions of injustice right now, that it feels like you have to be on your guard, and hyper aware 24/7 to avoid stepping on landmines. Again, this isn't just about race that was just the example used.

It's exhausting and people need to be able to tap out when necessary without the wrath of the universe coming down on them.

I will admit cancel culture seems to have slowed down a bit, but the threat is still there. Agree with the majority of people on the issues that matter most in the moment, or be destroyed.

For someone who never really liked or felt like a part of society in the first place.....it's like being held hostage by it now. You can't just turn it off.
You know what, it's there in plain sight front and centre now and it's the elephant in the room that nobody seems to address and if you bring it up it's being paranoid. The definitions used here are exactly the definitions used by people like DeSantis, Trump et.al in a way to describe what is wrong with the world and there is a war against these things - which is kind of hilarious and really sad at the same time because that is what you are being held hostage by now?


I really don't think the terms of "woke" "cancel culture" "SJW" are that useful and you know, it can put a person in their place, but it doesn't mean it's for the right reason and it certainly doesn't hold any one single elegant element of truth to it.

You can't seem to have a discussion on here lately without someone saying one of those terms in a way that discounts a person flat out. So the war is working but does anyone really want to see the victor in that war?
 
#75 ·
For this example, I'm focusing on racism.

So while listening to music from my past, I came across this old gem.



Lol, now I loved this song back in the day. But I realized there was a line in there, that would be totally considered unacceptable by today's standards.

"Be color blind, don't be so shallow!"

Now, when it comes to race things back in the day, I was an "ally". Fuck yeah! I'll see you as an individual! Rock on!

Now though, this is wrong. "We" decided, if we fail to see color, you're just a privileged A-hole.

Look, I'm not going to argue this. BUT, don't fucking call me racist. I don't care how many times society changes its mind about representation.

People go through trials and experiences, they change history for a reason. That doesn't mean someone who participated in an antebellum party, or said the "n" word with a soft a, is a racist. Time builds off the experiences of others.

Would people be such advocates of color recognition, if we hadn't been willing to be color blind in the first place?
So... if I take it right you are arguing about not judging an act out of his historical context. I think there is ample consensus about it with even worse examples.
 
#82 ·
For this example, I'm focusing on racism.

So while listening to music from my past, I came across this old gem.



Lol, now I loved this song back in the day. But I realized there was a line in there, that would be totally considered unacceptable by today's standards.

"Be color blind, don't be so shallow!"

Now, when it comes to race things back in the day, I was an "ally". Fuck yeah! I'll see you as an individual! Rock on!

Now though, this is wrong. "We" decided, if we fail to see color, you're just a privileged A-hole.

Look, I'm not going to argue this. BUT, don't fucking call me racist. I don't care how many times society changes its mind about representation.

People go through trials and experiences, they change history for a reason. That doesn't mean someone who participated in an antebellum party, or said the "n" word with a soft a, is a racist. Time builds off the experiences of others.

Would people be such advocates of color recognition, if we hadn't been willing to be color blind in the first place?
I mean, it's a song.

So I assume the term "color blind" might have been poetic, rather than the way the term is used now? Now more often to mean someone who is being willingly ignorant of the way people of different races are treated differently within a society...that some races tend to have struggles that may not be easy to understand when you do not belong to the race.

Being colorblind really just means that someone cannot see red or green usually--they have only a few cones in their eyes or something--it's a genetic thing. They cannot discern red from green. I think it's more common in men.

But the song's not talking about literal color blindness--but talking about seeing through the supeficial, and valuing people no matter what race they are. Not being a bigot. Not looking down.

Now, being color-blind has taken a meaning of being ignorant and insisting there are no racial inequality.



Here's a joking video about it--and I like this video but I also relate to this girl so it's kind of being called out for me. At the same time, I think this video has a lot of interesting points though it's supposed to be a silly comedy--because sometimes we do choose to ignore inequalities, just because talking about them is socially inappropriate (it's still not a dinner table topic to talk about race or politics), or because it forces us to face our ignorance or privilege etc.

Language changes...there are different meanings.

Colorblind initially was probably referring to not being able to see green/red--the medical condition we call "colorblind" which isn't truly colorblind, but due to having less cones in the eyes (or something).

Colorblind in the song--it's a song--it's poetry, and we'd have to ask the author of the song what she meant when she used that term. But it likely wasn't the same as how the term is used now.

And there's how it's used now, how it's been criticized, what it tends to mean now.
 
#84 ·
But the part of the video:

"So you don't see disability? So you wouldn't install a ramp in your building for someone in a wheelchair"

"I would refuse."

I think that's sort of where the difference lies:

That if you are "colorblind" in that you refuse to listen to people of different races experiences, because you just don't want to acknowledge that they've had struggles you may not relate with, or they may have a problem you haven't understood.

Or do you practice looking past people's skincolor to their value as people, regardless of their race?

So it's like, both might be called "colorblind" but it's taken on more of the former's meaning lately, as there has been a big surge of conservative and nationalistic effort in the world to erode the rights of people who are not wealthy and privileged.
 
#88 ·
Ok I did read an interview (skipped to the end where they mention the song)--this is how the interviewee interpreted the song--but I don't think she was the writer. Everyone will interpret it a little different.


Q: Your latest single, “Free Your Mind,” contains a powerful social message and is much more rock-oriented than the R&B; style that you’re associated with. How did that come about?

A: The point is it’s not just up to white people to do rock or black people to do R&B; and soul. We’re supposed to be about soul and glamour. That’s us, but I (also) grew up listening to rock. I wasn’t sure how people would accept the record, but they grabbed that song when it first hit. I’m amazed, because we’re black, we’re women, but we’re doing a rock song and people are accepting it.

To us, being able to do songs like this--songs that are supposedly out of our territory--is one of the good things about this business. There really are a lot of good things about this business, despite the schmoozing and rubbing elbows with people you really don’t want to be with.

In interviews, we get a lot of room to say whatever we want and get our points across. It’s not just being in a group and singing a part and wearing tight dresses. It’s being independent, strong, and self-reliant. It’s not letting people walk all over you.



 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top